Archive for 2008

December 16th, 2008

UK advertising predictions 2009

I think 2009 is going to be a year of immense change in the UK media landscape. But it’s not going to be the same for everyone. I predict that it will be a bad year for the traditional offline players whilst newer digital players will find 2009 painful but manageable. For many traditional media owners 2009 will be about survival - particularly in print. There is no doubt that the UK media scene will look very different in December 2009 to how it looks in December 2008.

Before we get into the detail, I think it makes sense to divide my 10 predictions into two groups: “structural change” and “reality checks”. The “structural change” predictions deal with fundamental corporate realignments that will be forced upon businesses in order to survive in the UK communications industry. The “reality-check” predictions relate to businesses that will have to make significant changes in how they operate to remain healthy and be in good shape to meet the challenges of the next few years. So below is a summary of what I think will happen in online and offline marketing and media community in 2009.

Structural changes (1-5):

1. The full effect of the flow of advertising revenue from offline to online media in recent years will make a profound impact on the the UK media scene in 2009. Media owner denial about underlying structural shifts in our industry will evolve into acceptance and the adoption of a ‘change or die’ corporate mentality. On reaching this enlightenment, media owners will use the recession as an excuse to make the big changes they’ve been putting off for years. There will be ruthless cost-cutting, divestment, re-structuring and closures.

2. In print, some established brands will collapse. One national newspaper will close or be sold. But the worst pain will be reserved for regional and local media which will come under severe financial pressure because of the combined effect of the shift to online, the crisis in the housing market and reduced expenditure from advertisers, particularly car dealers and retailers. Regional and local directories like Yell and Thomson will also have a very difficult year. All in all I predict regional media will be in for a torrid year, and suffer worse perhaps than any other channel.

3. In broadcast there is also going to be serious financial trouble. Some smaller TV stations may suffer badly and probably collapse. ITV’s situation will get steadily worse. Sky will continue to feel the impact of Freeview through declining rates of subscription growth, but its subscription base will make it less dependent on advertising revenue and allow it to weather the recession in reasonably good shape. Problems will come for Sky if the recession goes on for more than a year and consumers think twice about re-subscribing. Regional radio will suffer badly because of its dependence on cars and retail.

4. Online will not be exempt from any pain (see also 6,7,8) but it will be display advertising networks that have to bear the brunt of it. The whole area of blind networks delivering view based conversions will come under increased scrutiny. These advertising / business models will be under the magnifying glass of both advertisers and investors. Ad revenues will decline and investors will start to duck out. This will cause a shake out in online display advertising networks; some will fold and the lucky ones will be taken over.

5. On the agency side of the business, some traditional agencies could run into serious financial trouble and some may even go under - particularly those with an over-dependence on automotive and retail brands. As usual in a recession, those agencies able to prove a causal link between their activity and sales are likely to suffer less than those agencies who can’t.

Reality-checks (6-10):

6. The business models of social media stars like Facebook will come under increased financial scrutiny as brand owners realise it’s very difficult to communicate in these environments and investors realise it’s therefore very difficult to make money. Some social media sites will be bought up by bigger online and perhaps offline players seeking to broaden their offering.

7. Microsoft may concede it can’t win in paid search and may even surrender and divest from it. Even if this doesn’t happen, watch out for other significant online and offline investments from Microsoft.

8. Google will show signs of maturity and will be forced into making a big move to maintain momentum and investor interest. Anticipate something like a big traditional media owner purchase, the takeover of a big social media player or more mobile developments.

9. There will be significant shedding of non-core corporate assets across the board. More companies will lose patience with their seedlings and turn out the light. Rather ironically from a corporate point of view, traditional media businesses are likely to close their digital businesses. This will reflect the fact that the dominant business model in these companies cannot yet monetise online and digital profitably.

10. Consumers will be lackadaisical about very high speed broadband. As the revelations about high speed actually being slow speed gain more momentum, offers of higher speeds will be met with increased cynicism. As a result, take-up will be slow and providers may run into problems. Those companies betting that offering even higher speeds will add new life to a maturing market may lose.

Despite all this, here’s to a Happy Christmas and 2009.

December 9th, 2008

Rory Sutherland as new IPA President

I think it’s great news that Rory Sutherland has been made the flag-flyer at the IPA. This is for two reasons. Firstly he’s a direct marketer through and through. And whilst the traditional mass-analogue advertising model still has a big role to play in marketing communications, times have changed with the advent of the internet, mobile and ipods. One-to-one communciation is becoming an increasingly important, if not dominant model. As a direct marketer with a broad mind, Rory is a great choice to be the standard bearer of this change in the advertising community. His appointment marks a coming of age for direct marketing.

Secondly, anyone in advertising, and particularly anyone with a creative pedigree who is broad-minded enough to say, “I eccentrically believe data analysis and really good statistical modelling can be immensely creative - because, just like a good creative team, well-worked data can reveal wonderfully unexpected, unasked for truths” automatically gets a vote from me. As David Ogilvy once said, in advertising it pays to be unorthodox.

However, it’s a shame that Rory has to feel ‘eccentric’ when it comes to promoting the benefits of using hard data. Advertising does seem fixated on basing its decisions on what people say they might do in some given situation rather than looking at what people have actually done in a known situation.

Data doubters in advertising argue that data analysis can only provide ‘rear view’ insight and therefore has only limited application in the creative process. But the past is a repository of great learning and there should be no doubting how this can help us better manage the future. The reality is that all intellectual development and economic progress is a product of the past. If you don’t believe me, ask Barack Obama what he’s learnt from FDR or look at what the Beatles learnt from skiffle. So, if looking backwards can help us solve the current global economic crisis, or create some of the greatest popular music of all time, then surely it can certainly help us sell cars, cereals and holidays.

December 3rd, 2008

Can marketing use social media networks for advertising?

,So the mighty P&G has spoken about social media. When these companies speak the marketing community has to listen. These guys think long and hard about the issues to cut straight through the hype. I know because I did it for Unilever. I worked directly with Unilever digital teams to help them understand the real value of digital media to their business. So, what was the basic message emanating from P&G? Well it’s that social media is not “media” and there’s no point in advertising around “someone breaking up with their girlfriend”.

I disagree slightly with the first part of this criticism. Social media is a form of media because it is space which carries content and delivers an audience that can be traded for money. From an advertising perspective these are the core characteristics of a “medium”. The big question comes when we try to explore what type of medium social media actually is.

In reality social media is not social media, it’s personal media. Social media is really comprised of groups of individuals sharing their personal communications. These social media communications are online versions of personal phone calls, text messages or letters. And whilst in some cases individuals may be prepared to publish these communications, it doesn’t follow that advertising placed in them will be effective. Such advertising is the equivalent of a radio ad in a phone call.

Advertising media planning is no longer about reach (and sites like Facebook certainly deliver reach). Twenty-first century media planning is about going deeper than reach, it’s about delivering mindsets, engagement and involvement. And it’s a fact that whilst an individual is deeply involved in a personal communication, like dumping their girlfriend, they are unlikely to engage with advertising in or around that communication. This notion was encapsulated by David Ogilvy who once observed that you’re more likely to get the best direct response from an ad placed in the afternoon movie repeat than in the latest episode of Dallas (The big hit drama of the day). In other words, advertising can’t win when competing with high value content.

A few months ago on I wrote “Advertising on social networks is a Web 1.0 technique in a Web 2.0 world. It may be the case that carrying ads is not a sustainable route for these networks or for advertisers.” I think this remains the case. It’s a problem for the likes of Facebook though, because if they cannot monetize their inventory their value will fall. So how might sites like Facebook monetize their inventory? I think their answer is to monetize the relationships they have with their users. But this isn’t an ad model. It’s something more akin to Seth Godin’s permission marketing and value exchange. Facebook has a brand franchise. It needs to provide added value to its users by teaming up with partners and offering deals to its users. Social media should be an enabler which allows companies and individuals to exchange value.

December 1st, 2008

Advertising Frequency and Diminishing Marginal Utility

Economists have a concept called Diminishing Marginal Utility. This means that each additional time a consumer consumes something they get less satisfaction from consuming it. So, if I have one coffee, I find it very satisfying, two could be OK, but by the time I get to three I’m not getting much additional satisfaction, infact, I’m going off coffee pretty fast. And if I were to drink ten coffees I’d feel like I was being tortured.

Now let me apply this thinking to the world of TV advertising and in particular, sponsorship. In the UK, quality drama is a favourite for sponsorship. One of the reasons for this is that these programmes attract a high quality loyal audience who make an appointment to view. Certain drama strands can be sponsored heavily in a cross-programme deal covering different programmes in the same genre. Whilst this may appear to present great media value it can mean over-exposure for both brands and consumers. Seeing a break bumper a couple of times is fine, but seeing the same branded break bumper ten times in the same evening can seem like drinking that tenth cup of coffee.

November 14th, 2008

The Big Issue: To buy or not to buy

There’s a guy who sells the Big Issue on our street corner. Sometimes I buy it, sometimes I don’t. What interests me is a consumer behaviour question about myself. Why is it that I buy the Big Issue on some occasions and not others?

The vendor’s product is always right; I like it and it’s consistent in its quality. His targeting is good; he’s always in the right place. He has a good position; he’s right where I expect to see him. He’s delivers his message at the right frequency; two or three times a week. He even secures engagement with a smile that reflects that fact that I’m one of his regular customers.

And yet sometimes I don’t buy, even worse, I consciously avoid exchanging glances, preferring to stare at the pavement or my Blackberry. So what is it that makes me either buy or not buy? I see two reasons: The first is what I’m doing and the second is my mood. If I’m rushed I simply don’t have time to stop and respond; mentally I’m in the next place. The problem for him is that he can’t anticipate what I’m doing and how rushed I’m going to be. Time is a precious commodity. Perhaps if he said ‘take it now and pay later’ he might get more sales. If I’m in the wrong mood I won’t respond, even if perhaps on some level I might want to. It’s unlikely that he’ll alter that mood no matter what he does. If he smiles at me and I’m in a grump that only makes a connection even less likely. But if, instead of smiling, he empathised with me and said “What a shit day!” I might consider making a purchase because he’s tuned into something that’s stopped me purchasing; my mood.

I recently worked on a financial services pitch. Tricky stuff at the moment. Consumers are jittery and avoiding big commitments. They’re nervous that the institutions they’ve trusted for years can collapse like a house of cards. As a result, product claims are a falling currency when it comes to differentiation. Under these circumstances it may be interesting to test creative work that reflects the mood of the target audience rather than the attributes of the company, brand or the product. That’s an approach that is rarely used in financial services; they much prefer talking about savings rates, investment performance or service. But empathy with a collective mood of confusion and fear may be an interesting route for a financial services institution wanting to engage in these unstable times.

October 20th, 2008

A Secure Office Cabinet

Searched Google today for a “Secure Office Cabinet”. In position 4 in my Google search returns was the UK Cabinet Office Intelligence and Security Committee. I think this raises important questions. Does Google in its infinite information-driven wisdom, know that the Home Office Cabinet Security Committee with its brief to “examine the policy, administration and expenditure of the Security Service” is in fact nothing more than a secure cupboard tucked away in Whitehall? Or is it the case that Google really can’t tell the difference between a high ranking government department and vendors of lockable office storage cupboards? There is of course a third and rather Pythoneqsue possibility: that the Security Committee meets in a cupboard. This is not as ludicrous as it sounds; the Beatles reputedly recorded their White album track “Yer Blues” in a studio cupboard.

Interestingly for SEO purists, the SERP #1 return, LA Office, had a PR of 1/10 whilst the government department at SERP #4 has a PR of 5/10.